Just how virtuous is faith really?

[OnceConvinced]

This thread is inspired by a question Divine Insight asked recently, questioning just why we should consider faith virtuous.

Theists talk of faith as if being faithful is some kind of great virtue. Something that is so crucial to our well being. Sure, the bible tells us this, but really why is faith so virtuous? Why is it so important to a god?

I especially ask this from a non-theist perspective, why should anyone see faith as virtuous? As something desirable?

[Clownboat]

[Replying to post 1 by OnceConvinced]

My simple definition first of faith: To believe in something without having proof and/or to have hope that something is true until proven otherwise.

A personal example: I have faith that my wife will love me for the rest of her life.

I think it can be virtuous in that it can show you have a positive outlook. You choose to believe in something good even if it can't be proven to be true.

Obviously this is not exhaustive, but there you go.

It is sad to hear that this takes faith for you.
I have 19 yrs of data that suggest that mine will love me until death.

Now for me to believe that I have a wife that I have never seen, cannot hear or interact with, but that she will love me for life would take faith since there is no supporting data to suggest that such a notion is even rational.

[Clownboat]

Our GOD is not into rape...

Numbers 31:17-18
Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

[benchwarmer]

[Replying to post 31 by Clownboat]

It is sad to hear that this takes faith for you.
I have 19 yrs of data that suggest that mine will love me until death.

Now for me to believe that I have a wife that I have never seen, cannot hear or interact with, but that she will love me for life would take faith since there is no supporting data to suggest that such a notion is even rational.

My point is that I can't know 100% for a fact how my wife will feel about me in the future. You basically say the same thing: "I have 19ys of data to suggest"

So I think we are both saying the same thing with different words. I believe, based on evidence so far (18 yrs for me), that my wife will love me until death as well. As a matter of fact I'm pretty confident about it. I can't scientifically prove that, so I have to believe, hope, and/or have faith.

Now is any of this virtuous? I don't know, I only offered that it might be seen that way if you consider a positive or hopeful outlook as virtuous.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to post 11 by Tired of the Nonsense]

Why would God allow the deaths of those in His own house of worship, including the most innocent, who were there in the very act of worshiping him, when all He had to do was to prevent the walls from collapsing? The problem is that when put to the test, make believe is invariably unaffected by the harsh realities of real life.

Precisely. Student talks about his faith having evidence to back it up. Well...imagine if the walls just sort of floated above the heads of the worshippers in this situation. THAT would be evidence to strongly indicate the presence of a god who cares about his followers. Why, he even suspends gravity to save them!
Oh wait, no that didn't happen.

Believers inevitably declare that they have the evidence to back up their claims. And just as inevitably their "evidence" turns out to be something like, "I declare that the universe could not simply 'just be,' therefore I declare that it must be the result of a Supreme Being who simply 'just is.'" Or, "I declare that the Bible is the Word of God, therefore I declare that all claims made by the Bible are valid." The disconnect between that which represents actual physical evidence, and "I know it to be true because that's what I believe," is astounding.

[JehovahsWitness]

Well, if that god creature has consistently acted in an absolute moralistic manner maybe, which no god in human history can be shown to have done...

Since I'm sure you'll agree no human is in a postition to say in the absolute sense what is moral or not, then no human is in a position to say whether a god has behaved in a "moral" way or not. It's all just relative right? In short, one man's (human's) moral is another's immoral based on where they are in the stream of time and society's judgement thereof, we don't "know" what is moral if there is no universal judge of what is good or bad, no one is in a postition to "know" whether anyone (physical or spiritual) has or has not acted in a moralistic manner or not.





RELATED POSTS

Can we judge God as having bad morals?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 42#p791542

What did Jesus mean when he said "No one is good except ...God"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 02#p942302

[JoeyKnothead]

From the OP:

Just how virtuous is faith really?

Faith holds no virtue, but how ya act on it can.

There's also the issue of measurin' a subjective term like "virtue".

Some seem to have thought flyin' planes into buildings was just as virtuous as all get out.

Some seem to think discriminatin' against the gays is a virtue all its own.

If only for me, your faith has no more meanin' than to be your faith. It's your works where I set to frettin' your virtues.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 35:

Since I'm sure you'll agree no human is in a postition to say in the absolute sense what is moral or not, then no human is in a position to say whether a god has behaved in a "moral" way or not.
...

'Til that god sets to judgin' my morality, then I get to set in on his.

Alas, I've yet to hear from God, but I'm here to tell it, it's hard as the dickens to run across a Christian that they don't tell me all about how their God judges me, only don't it beat all, readin' on it exposes God as far more immoral'n I can ever hope to be. How'm I gonna flood me a whole planet? Or rain down Hell and brimstone on towns and cities? Or send up plagues and get bears to attack folks?

I have every right to judge all who'd judge me, if only so's I can tell they've judged me right.

[JehovahsWitness]

'Til that god sets to judgin' my morality, then I get to set in on his.

You get to have an opinion, sure. You get to have a belief on that matter (you can even tell others about that belief and try and convince them to adopt it... we in the business call that "preaching"), but what you don't get to have is the authority to decide what is actually is good and or not for others and therefore any statement about what any supposed God has or has not done in terms of morals is just that... a belief you are propulgating.

Good for you, but I'm sure you are not suggesting others can't have opposing beliefs.

JW

[OnceConvinced]

Faith holds no virtue, but how ya act on it can.

It very much does appear to me to be that it is indeed the acts which show a person to be virtuous or not. What one believes or holds dear does not really show us how virtuous one is.

As we can see, faith can lead people to do horrendous acts. So you can't at all consider faith to be virtuous. It's all about what one does based on that faith.

So how worthless is faith if no good comes of it? Surely it would be just as virtuous to remain faithless?

James 2:14
What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?

[JehovahsWitness]

As we can see, faith can lead people to do horrendous acts.

So faith has an effect on people's actions. If that is true can it be proven that that effect is always negative. And if it cannot can one reasonably assume that faith can have both a negative and a positive effect on actions.

It's all about what one does based on that faith.

Again, so if faith can provide the "basis" for action, why the implied assumption that it cannot move anyone on earth to posititve actions? Since faith is an internal belief system, we would reasonably take into account the personal testimony of those that do what is commonly considered as "good works" and claim they were motivated by their faith. Based upon what therefore do we conclude that this cannot be so?

So you can't at all consider faith to be virtuous.

Do you consider yourself in a position to tell people what they "can" or "cannot" do or do you really mean you "should not" as in "I do not, and you should not either"? (as in I'm right and anyone that disagrees with me is wrong). I would love to go about telling people what they "can" and "can't" do but I hesitate because to do so I would have to have absolute knowledge of their mental, emotional, physical and moral capacity as well as know where their right to exercise them should end; if I had all that, I would have to be what many deny could possibly exist... a god.


JW